No description available.

本研究探討在美發行存託憑證之外國公司（ADR公司）採用不同會計準則編製財務報表，對於分析師盈餘預測之影響；以及美國證券交易委員會(SEC)於2007年11月15日免除採用國際會計準則之ADR公司編製Form 20-F調節表規定，對於分析師盈餘預測之影響。針對主題一實證結果顯示，相較於外國公司所屬國家之會計準則，國際會計準則(IFRS)與美國一般公認會計原則(US GAAP)在提供資訊能力上較佳，有助於分析師之盈餘預測；然而進一步的實證則顯示IFRS與US GAAP間在提供資訊能力上並無明顯差異。此外，研究發現當外國公司之所屬國家為法制力較高的國家時，較有助於分析師之盈餘預測。針對主題二實證結果，本研究實證結果支持SEC對於免除採IFRS公司編製Form 20-F調節表的預期，並未發現任何證據顯示SEC免除ADR公司編製Form 20-F調節表，對於分析師進行盈餘預測時會有資訊遺失(information loss)的現象，本文實證結果亦顯示對於分析師而言IFRS與US GAAP所編製的財務報表可以提供類似的資訊。

Der Beitrag prüft den Stand der de facto-Konvergenz von IFRS und US-GAAP anhand der Überleitungsrechnungen gemäß Form 20-F von 114 europäischen IFRS-Bilanzierern. Die Analyse von 1.928 Einzelposten verdeutlicht die Heterogenität und das oft wesentliche Ausmaß der Differenzen zwischen den Ergebnis- und Eigenkapitalgrößen nach IFRS und nach US-GAAP. Diese gründen vorrangig auf hohen Teildifferenzen aus der Bilanzierung von Unternehmenszusammenschlüssen, immateriellen Vermögenswerten und Pensionen. Neben der Branchenzugehörigkeit beeinflussen die Erstanwendung von IFRS und die Rechnungslegungstradition die ausgewiesenen Differenzen. Die Ergebnisse offenbaren einen bislang geringen Stand der de facto-Konvergenz und deuten auf Umstellungseffekte sowie international inkonsistente Anwendung der Standards hin. Insbesondere implizieren die parallelen Abschlussgrößen eine frühere Gewinnvereinnahmung nach US-GAAP und insoweit eine vorsichtigere Bilanzierung nach IFRS, die in common law-Staaten starker ausgeprägt ist als in code law-Staaten. Neben der Branchenzugehörigkeit beeinflussen die Erstanwendung von IFRS und die Rechnungslegungstradition die ausgewiesenen Differenzen. Die Ergebnisse offenbaren einen bislang geringen Stand der de facto-Konvergenz und deuten auf Umstellungseffekte sowie international inkonsistente Anwendung der Standards hin. Insbesondere implizieren die parallelen Abschlussgrößen eine frühere Gewinnvereinnahmung nach US-GAAP und insoweit eine vorsichtigere Bilanzierung nach IFRS, die in common law-Staaten stärker ausgeprägt ist als in code law-Staaten. / This paper examines the level of de facto convergence of IFRSs and U.S. GAAP based on Form 20-F reconciliations of 114 EU companies. Our analysis of 1.928 reconciling items illustrates that de facto differences between IFRSs and U.S. GAAP are heterogeneous and often material in both net income and shareholder’s equity. Particularly, adjustments for business combinations, intangibles and pensions are predominant. We find significant differences between numerical adjustments (1) of first-time adopters and non-first-time adopters of IFRSs, (2) of companies in the financial and non-financial sector, and (3) of companies domiciled in common law and code law countries with each former group tending to larger adjustments. This implies that adoption effects and institutional factors impact the amount of adjustments. Our overall results indicate a poor level of de facto convergence achieved to date and an inconsistent application of accounting standards. Particularly, results imply earlier profit recognition under U.S. GAAP and more conservative accounting under IFRSs, which are more prevalent in common law countries than in code law countries. Particularly, results imply earlier profit recognition under U.S. GAAP and more conservative accounting under IFRSs, which are more prevalent in common law countries than in code law countries.

Background: With an increased global market, where companies seek capital abroad, the demand for a more uniform accounting standard has been raised. This uniform accounting standard is not yet available, differences between accounting standards still exists. Several Swedish companies seek risk capital in the USA and some are part of a concern that is listed on the American stock exchange. This means that the Securities and Exchange Commission requires the companies to do a reconciliation to US GAAP on those items that are considered material. This can be an extensive work for the companies if the knowledge about the differences between Swedish GAAP and US GAAP does not exist. Purpose: The purpose with this essay is to describe Swedish GAAP and US GAAP and experienced differences between them, and identify items that should be taken into consideration at a reconciliation. Further we have the purpose to examine the meaning of the expression material and how that affects what items that are chosen for reconciliation, and to create a model for analysis of what items are material. Accomplishment: We have done a research among an assortment of Swedish companies that do a reconciliation of their reports to US GAAP. The purpose of the research have been to identify differences between Swedish GAAP and US GAAP and which ones that are considered material and therefore should be reconciled. We have then described the identified differences and what effect those differences have from the view of a case company. The case company is Sydkraft ÖstVärme that are part of a German group that are listed on the American stock exchange and therefore are affected by US GAAP accounting. Results: Through the information from the research we have created a guideline that could be used as help when doing reconciliation. This guideline consists partly of a model of how an analysis of material items could function when choosing reconciliation items and partly of a compilation of the differences that have been identified and how they should be treated.

<p>Background: With an increased global market, where companies seek capital abroad, the demand for a more uniform accounting standard has been raised. This uniform accounting standard is not yet available, differences between accounting standards still exists. Several Swedish companies seek risk capital in the USA and some are part of a concern that is listed on the American stock exchange. This means that the Securities and Exchange Commission requires the companies to do a reconciliation to US GAAP on those items that are considered material. This can be an extensive work for the companies if the knowledge about the differences between Swedish GAAP and US GAAP does not exist. </p><p>Purpose: The purpose with this essay is to describe Swedish GAAP and US GAAP and experienced differences between them, and identify items that should be taken into consideration at a reconciliation. Further we have the purpose to examine the meaning of the expression material and how that affects what items that are chosen for reconciliation, and to create a model for analysis of what items are material. </p><p>Accomplishment: We have done a research among an assortment of Swedish companies that do a reconciliation of their reports to US GAAP. The purpose of the research have been to identify differences between Swedish GAAP and US GAAP and which ones that are considered material and therefore should be reconciled. We have then described the identified differences and what effect those differences have from the view of a case company. The case company is Sydkraft ÖstVärme that are part of a German group that are listed on the American stock exchange and therefore are affected by US GAAP accounting. </p><p>Results: Through the information from the research we have created a guideline that could be used as help when doing reconciliation. This guideline consists partly of a model of how an analysis of material items could function when choosing reconciliation items and partly of a compilation of the differences that have been identified and how they should be treated.</p>

Under de senaste decennierna har företag, nationer och ekonomier blivit alltmerkunskapsorienterade. Samtidigt som världsglobaliseringen av ekonomier för multinationellaföretag innebär att innehavet av internt upparbetade immateriella tillgångar ökar och får alltstörre betydelse. Globaliseringen har föranlett till en expansiv tillväxt av börsmarknader samtökat antal korsnoterade multinationella företag. Investeringar i internt upparbetadeimmateriella tillgångar är kapital- och resurskrävande och notering på främmande marknaderses som ett lämpligt alternativ för att finansiera dessa tillgångar. De amerikanskabörsmarknaderna har länge varit attraktiva för utländska korsnoterade företag vid inhämtandeav kapital samt var tidigare förenliga med kraftiga regleringar avseende redovisning ochrapportering. I samband med att IASB blev den ledande normgivaren inom EU valde SEC atteliminera justeringsrekvisitet i Form 20-F för företag verksamma på de amerikanskabörsmarknaderna. Europeiska korsnoterade företag undgår att rapportera enligt US. GAAPförutsatt att de upprättar de konsoliderade finansiella rapporterna enligt IFRS. Borttagandet avjusteringsrekvisitet i Form 20-F sågs som en effekt av IASB:s och FASB:s konvergensprojekt.Åsikter har lyfts om att borttagandet skedde för tidigt då skillnader mellan normgivarna ärväsentliga, specifikt inom området internt upparbetade immateriella tillgångar.Syftet med studien är att redogöra för hur de europeiska korsnoterade företagen på deamerikanska börsmarknaderna NYSE och NASDAQ redovisar och rapporterar interntupparbetade immateriella tillgångar, i förhållande till börsvärde samt bransch- ochnationstillhörighet. Årsrapporteringen ska även ske till SEC med Form 20-F. Dessutom syftarstudien till att urskilja om skillnader i redovisningen och rapporteringen påverkarjämförbarheten mellan företag. Studien omfattar 40 årsrapporter från företag med säte inomEuropa. Ansatsen i studien liknar ett hermeneutiskt tillvägagångssätt där årsrapporternastuderas genom en multipel fallstudie med komparativa inslag, för att ge en djupare förståelseför redovisningen och rapporteringen av internt upparbetade immateriella tillgångar.Studien visar att användandet av IFRS ser olika ut utifrån nations- och branschtillhörighet,gemensamt är att investeringar ses som värdeadderande. Likväl att företagens börsvärdepåverkar benägenheten för upptagandet av en internt upparbetad immateriell tillgång.Företagens branschtillhörighet antyder sig ha en inverkan på benägenheten vid appliceringenav IAS 38 p. 57, vilket indikerar att enhetlighet för företag inom och mellan branscher är enunik företeelse. Ett negativt samband förekommer mellan osäkerhet och tidsåtgång iinvesteringsprocessen, där effekten blir att utgifter hänförliga till interna projekt kostnadsförsi resultatrapporten. Sannolikheten för erhållandet av framtida ekonomiska fördelar är högrevid egenupparbetade tillgångar som är avsedda för internt bruk, det motsatta gäller för externtbruk.Benägenheten att uppta tillgången blir således omgivningens informella påtryckningar, vilkavarierar beroende på branschtillhörighet. Av studien framgår att bedömningen ochuppskattningen av de framtida ekonomiska fördelarna är problematiskt att genomföra. Företaginom sjukvårdsbranschen har signifikanta problem med sådan bedömning, vilket innebär attde missgynnas då IFRS inte kan tillämpas fullt ut. Lämnandet av frivilliga och obligatoriskaupplysningar enligt IFRS varierar mellan branscherna. Jämförbarheten kan ifrågasättas dåredovisningen och rapporteringen av internt upparbetade immateriella tillgångar i storutsträckning sker samblandat med övriga immateriella tillgångar.I studien framtogs en undersökningsmodell för analys av datamaterialet. Modellen är till föratt analysera nationstillhörighetens inverkan på redovisningen och rapporteringen. Studien visar att nationstillhörighet fortfarande har en inverkan samtidigt som resultatet även indikeraratt skillnaderna håller på att suddas ut. / During the last decade companies, nations and economies are increasingly becoming moreknowledge oriented. Meanwhile the world globalization of economies means, to multinationalcompanies, that the holding of internally generated intangible assets is increasing and is ofincreasing importance. The globalization has led to an expansive growth of the stock marketsand has increased the number of cross-listed multinational companies. Investments ininternally generated intangible assets are capital as well as resource intensive and listing onforeign markets is seen as a suitable alternative to finance these assets. The US stock marketshave long been attractive to foreign cross-listed companies in obtaining capital, and wereconsistent with heavy regulations on accounting and reporting. IASB became the leadingstandard setter in the EU and therefore SEC chose to eliminate the conversion of necessaryprerequisite in Form 20-F for the companies operating in the US stock markets. Europeancross-listed companies avoid reporting under US. GAAP as long as they establish theconsolidated financial statements according to IFRS. The removal of Form 20-F was seen asan effect of the IASB and FASB convergence project. Opinions have been raised that theremoval was premature because the difference between the standard setters are essential,particularly in the area of internally generated intangible assets.The purpose of this study is to describe how the European cross-listed companies on the USstock markets, the NYSE and NASDAQ, account and report internally generated intangibleassets relative to market capitalization, industry and nationality. The annual report should alsohave been established with the Form 20-F. Another reason with this study is to identifydifferences in the accounting and reporting, which recognize the effects on comparabilitybetween companies. Our study is based on 40 annual reports of companies based in Europe.The methodology we’ve chosen for this study is similar to a hermeneutic approach and theannual reports are considered using a multiple case study with comparative elements. The aimis to provide a deeper understanding of the accounting and reporting of internally generatedintangible assets.This study shows the use of IFRS varies based on nationality and industry affiliation, howeverthe companies view investment as value added. And, furthermore, how the stock value affectsthe enable and the propensity for an internally generated intangible asset. Companies industryaffiliation suggests to have an impact on the propensity for the application of IAS 38, p. 57,indicating that the uniformity of the company within and between sectors is a uniquephenomenon. A negative correlation exists between uncertainty and the period of time in theinvestment process, where the effect is that the expenses attributable to internal projects areexpensed in the financial statements. The probability of obtaining future economic benefitsare higher for internally generated intangible assets which are intended for internal use, the opposite applies to external use. Informal pressure from the surrounding, which variesaccording to industry affiliation, has effected the possibility to enable the propensity. Thestudy shows that the valuation and the estimate of the future economic benefits are difficult.Companies in the healthcare industry have significant problems with such a valuation, whichmeans that they are disadvantaged as IFRS cannot be fully applied. Publishing of voluntaryand mandatory information under IFRS varies between sectors. The comparability isquestionable when the accounting and reporting of internally generated intangible assets aremerged with other intangible assets.In this study a study model was made for analyzing the data. The model is to analyze thenationality impact on the financial statements and reporting. The study shows that nationalitystill have an impact, while the results also indicate that the differences constantly are beingerased.This thesis is written in Swedish.